Thought on McDonald and Heller dissents

The legislative history (and evidence of public understanding) of the 14th Amendment quite clearly, to my mind, that the Amendment was meant to require States to observe the Second Amendment.

The Heller dissent reads the Second Amendment as intended solely to protect the right of States and their peoples to be prepared to resist forcefully Federal decisions that are seen as tyrannical.

What are the odds that the RECONSTRUCTION Congresses would have meant to affirm the right of States and their peoples to resist Federal decisions with armed force? Section three of the Amendment (today forgotten) went on to bar from public office anyone who had taken an oath of allegiance to the US and thereafter "shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same...."